I recently attended an Israel Independence Day celebration at Stanford University. The celebration itself was less than inspiring. The main slogan, printed on the official t-shirts, was "Israel Wants Peace". This weak message seemed to suggest that Israel is prepared to give its enemies anything they demand, as long as they promise to stop attacking it.
The speakers focused on issues such as Israel's technological prowess and environmental achievements. But nobody mentioned Judaism itself, or made any reference to God, or offered any explanation as to why Israel has the right to possess any particular piece of real estate.
Having sanitized the event of any trace of religion, and any discussion of the issues that really matter, they offered nothing that would cause Israel to be more respected by its friends, or more feared by its enemies.
So, the highlight for me was a long talk I had with one of the Moslem protestors. The protestors, whether by their own decision or by university fiat, behaved in an orderly way. Although they held up signs and posters with the usual libelous accusations, they stood silently on the edges of the rally and made no attempt to disrupt it.
Deciding that I could learn more from my enemies than my friends, I walked over to the protestors, and started a conversation with one of them. He said he was from Bangladesh and was draped in an Arafat-style keffiyeh, in contrast to my Arutz-7 baseball cap. He assured me that Islam recognizes all of the Hebrew prophets as genuine, and also recognizes later prophets such as Jesus and Mohammed. I expressed no disagreement, since experience has shown me that you can't win a debate with someone by demanding that he believe in the truth of your scriptures, while you simultaneously deny the truth of his.
He then asked if I believed that the Palestinians should receive justice. I answered that of course, I believed all people should receive justice. However, Israel was not doing any injustice to the Palestinians. It was their own attacks on Jews that were causing their problems.
"But don't you agree," he asked, "that Israel completely dominates the Palestinians, is much stronger militarily, and uses this power to oppress them?"
I replied that if you just look at the Land of Israel itself, then yes, Israel is stronger than the Arabs. But the Palestinians are just one branch of the overall Arab nation. If we expand our view to the whole region, we see that 150 million Arabs, including the Palestinians, are surrounding five million Jews and seeking their destruction. So it's the Israelis, not the Arabs, who are most threatened in this conflict.
"But still," he said, "the Israelis are occupying Arab land. If they would withdraw from that land, the conflict would be over."
My answer was that "the Land of Israel belongs to the Jews, not the Arabs. God promised it to the Jews and to no one else."
He said that yes, God gave the land to the Jews long ago, but they lost it because of disobedience to God, and now it's passed to other people.
"God has never cancelled his covenant with the Jews," I responded. "The Torah itself predicted that the Israelites would not be able to maintain the very high standards required of them, and would be driven into exile, but it also said that God would never abandon them, and that he would eventually restore them to their land, which is exactly what's happening today."
"Still," he opined, "the Arabs have lived there for a very long time, and the Jews just arrived recently. Why should the Arabs be expected to move aside for the Jews?"
"First of all," I countered, "the land was never empty of Jews. Even at the height of the exile, there was always some Jewish presence in the land. And those in exile never gave up their claim to the land. Every year for almost 2,000 years, they prayed 'Next year in Jerusalem'. And it's also important to realize that during the Jewish exile, the Arab population of the land was also very small. Only when Jews started returning in large numbers, did Arabs also start moving to the land, in order to benefit from the economic opportunities created by the Jews. The Jews made the desert bloom."
"It was God who made the desert bloom," he contradicted me. "Yes," I agreed, "but he made it bloom only for the Jews, and not for anyone else. The Land of Israel is a very rich land, but it never yielded up its riches to anyone other than the Jews, the rightful owners."
"But what about all the Arabs suffering in the refugee camps?" he asked.
"Those camps are in Arab countries," I answered. "It's not Israel who's forcing the Palestinians to stay there, it's their own fellow Arabs. If the Arab states would simply absorb the Palestinians into their own societies, there would be no problem."
"That can't be done," he said, "because an injustice has been done to them, their homes were taken away, and they should be able to return to their homes instead of having to live someplace else."
"But what if they're willing to drop their claims, and become citizens of an Arab state? Shouldn't they be able to make that decision for themselves, instead of being forced to stay in the camps?" I asked.
He didn't want to concede the point, but didn't have a good response to my argument. I then recounted how God had driven out seven nations from the land of Canaan, each one larger and more powerful than the Israelites, in order to bring the Israelites into the land. I asked him if he agreed that everything in the world belongs to God, including all the land, and if so, didn't God have the right to give land to whomever He wished, or take it away from whomever He wished?
He didn't want to admit that God's rights over the land superseded the Arab claims, because that would open the possibility that God in fact was giving it to the Jews, regardless of what the Arabs wanted. But he was finding it hard to respond to my assertions.
At this point, he said he had to leave for a class, and I also had an engagement, so we parted amicably and shook hands.
So what's the point of this story? The point is that we can make our case successfully, and not let the whole world drift into the anti-Jewish camp by default. I didn't deny his religion, but I affirmed my own. I identified the religious beliefs we shared in common, and propounded the Torah with confidence. I was not argumentative or abusive. I listened to his words respectfully, and he accorded me the same respect. I presented ideas that he had probably never heard before, and got him to thinking. And I didn't try to change who I was in order to make an impression. I stood firm on the Covenant, conceded nothing to his position, and we parted peacefully.
If Israel would only stand firm on the Covenant, and be the nation that God meant it to be, instead of constantly trying to remold itself into a shape that it thinks will be more pleasing to non-Jews, it would be much more successful than it is now. When Israel finally reaches the point where it fears God more than it fears its enemies, and trusts God more than it trusts its friends, then God will respond to our prayers, and our enemies will flee in every direction.
The speakers focused on issues such as Israel's technological prowess and environmental achievements. But nobody mentioned Judaism itself, or made any reference to God, or offered any explanation as to why Israel has the right to possess any particular piece of real estate.
Having sanitized the event of any trace of religion, and any discussion of the issues that really matter, they offered nothing that would cause Israel to be more respected by its friends, or more feared by its enemies.
So, the highlight for me was a long talk I had with one of the Moslem protestors. The protestors, whether by their own decision or by university fiat, behaved in an orderly way. Although they held up signs and posters with the usual libelous accusations, they stood silently on the edges of the rally and made no attempt to disrupt it.
Deciding that I could learn more from my enemies than my friends, I walked over to the protestors, and started a conversation with one of them. He said he was from Bangladesh and was draped in an Arafat-style keffiyeh, in contrast to my Arutz-7 baseball cap. He assured me that Islam recognizes all of the Hebrew prophets as genuine, and also recognizes later prophets such as Jesus and Mohammed. I expressed no disagreement, since experience has shown me that you can't win a debate with someone by demanding that he believe in the truth of your scriptures, while you simultaneously deny the truth of his.
He then asked if I believed that the Palestinians should receive justice. I answered that of course, I believed all people should receive justice. However, Israel was not doing any injustice to the Palestinians. It was their own attacks on Jews that were causing their problems.
"But don't you agree," he asked, "that Israel completely dominates the Palestinians, is much stronger militarily, and uses this power to oppress them?"
I replied that if you just look at the Land of Israel itself, then yes, Israel is stronger than the Arabs. But the Palestinians are just one branch of the overall Arab nation. If we expand our view to the whole region, we see that 150 million Arabs, including the Palestinians, are surrounding five million Jews and seeking their destruction. So it's the Israelis, not the Arabs, who are most threatened in this conflict.
"But still," he said, "the Israelis are occupying Arab land. If they would withdraw from that land, the conflict would be over."
My answer was that "the Land of Israel belongs to the Jews, not the Arabs. God promised it to the Jews and to no one else."
He said that yes, God gave the land to the Jews long ago, but they lost it because of disobedience to God, and now it's passed to other people.
"God has never cancelled his covenant with the Jews," I responded. "The Torah itself predicted that the Israelites would not be able to maintain the very high standards required of them, and would be driven into exile, but it also said that God would never abandon them, and that he would eventually restore them to their land, which is exactly what's happening today."
"Still," he opined, "the Arabs have lived there for a very long time, and the Jews just arrived recently. Why should the Arabs be expected to move aside for the Jews?"
"First of all," I countered, "the land was never empty of Jews. Even at the height of the exile, there was always some Jewish presence in the land. And those in exile never gave up their claim to the land. Every year for almost 2,000 years, they prayed 'Next year in Jerusalem'. And it's also important to realize that during the Jewish exile, the Arab population of the land was also very small. Only when Jews started returning in large numbers, did Arabs also start moving to the land, in order to benefit from the economic opportunities created by the Jews. The Jews made the desert bloom."
"It was God who made the desert bloom," he contradicted me. "Yes," I agreed, "but he made it bloom only for the Jews, and not for anyone else. The Land of Israel is a very rich land, but it never yielded up its riches to anyone other than the Jews, the rightful owners."
"But what about all the Arabs suffering in the refugee camps?" he asked.
"Those camps are in Arab countries," I answered. "It's not Israel who's forcing the Palestinians to stay there, it's their own fellow Arabs. If the Arab states would simply absorb the Palestinians into their own societies, there would be no problem."
"That can't be done," he said, "because an injustice has been done to them, their homes were taken away, and they should be able to return to their homes instead of having to live someplace else."
"But what if they're willing to drop their claims, and become citizens of an Arab state? Shouldn't they be able to make that decision for themselves, instead of being forced to stay in the camps?" I asked.
He didn't want to concede the point, but didn't have a good response to my argument. I then recounted how God had driven out seven nations from the land of Canaan, each one larger and more powerful than the Israelites, in order to bring the Israelites into the land. I asked him if he agreed that everything in the world belongs to God, including all the land, and if so, didn't God have the right to give land to whomever He wished, or take it away from whomever He wished?
He didn't want to admit that God's rights over the land superseded the Arab claims, because that would open the possibility that God in fact was giving it to the Jews, regardless of what the Arabs wanted. But he was finding it hard to respond to my assertions.
At this point, he said he had to leave for a class, and I also had an engagement, so we parted amicably and shook hands.
So what's the point of this story? The point is that we can make our case successfully, and not let the whole world drift into the anti-Jewish camp by default. I didn't deny his religion, but I affirmed my own. I identified the religious beliefs we shared in common, and propounded the Torah with confidence. I was not argumentative or abusive. I listened to his words respectfully, and he accorded me the same respect. I presented ideas that he had probably never heard before, and got him to thinking. And I didn't try to change who I was in order to make an impression. I stood firm on the Covenant, conceded nothing to his position, and we parted peacefully.
If Israel would only stand firm on the Covenant, and be the nation that God meant it to be, instead of constantly trying to remold itself into a shape that it thinks will be more pleasing to non-Jews, it would be much more successful than it is now. When Israel finally reaches the point where it fears God more than it fears its enemies, and trusts God more than it trusts its friends, then God will respond to our prayers, and our enemies will flee in every direction.